|
Author
|
Topic: Chance of another flight had Apollo 17 failed?
|
osizz
New Member Posts:
From:
Registered:
|
posted 08-10-2011 02:07 PM
   
If something had happened on 17 that had not allowed a landing (I'm thinking an equipment failure, though not one endangering the lives of the crew), is there a chance NASA would have pushed to use what is now just museum hardware for one final landing? Or would the Apollo program just have ended on a sour note? |
Blackarrow
Member Posts: 3160
From: Belfast, United Kingdom
Registered: Feb 2002
|
posted 08-10-2011 02:22 PM
The world of Apollo would have ended "not with a bang but a whimper." |
tfrielin
Member Posts: 162
From: Athens, GA
Registered: Feb 2007
|
posted 08-10-2011 05:23 PM
There were tw0 Saturn Vs available and a couple of CSMs after Apollo 17. But there was only one LEM (ok, LM) available — LM-9 which today hangs in the Apollo Saturn V Center at Kennedy Space Center. The problem with LM-9 is/was it was not a J-mission LEM so had no more than about a 36 hour lunar surface duration a la Apollos 12 and 14. Would NASA have wanted to execute its final lunar landing mission (Apollo 18 in this scenario) as a step back after the successful three day lunar surface stay times of Apollo 15 and 16? I doubt it. Even if the money had been there, which it wasn't. |
ilbasso
Member Posts: 1522
From: Greensboro, NC USA
Registered: Feb 2006
|
posted 08-10-2011 08:39 PM
It wasn't only money. After the close call of Apollo 13, there were many executives in NASA and the administration who felt that we should not take any further chances risking lives on more Moon missions, now that Kennedy's goal had been achieved. |
Hart Sastrowardoyo
Member Posts: 3446
From: Toms River, NJ
Registered: Aug 2000
|
posted 08-10-2011 09:12 PM
Couldn't they finished LM-13, assuming of course they got the money to do so? |
Fra Mauro
Member Posts: 1624
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 08-11-2011 09:38 AM
Lot of reasons for the answer to the topic to be no — $, political will by the Nixon administration, and a more cautious approach by NASA leadership. As for LM-13, I'm not sure if the Grumman construction facilities had been shut down. LM-12 had been shipped out months early, and as far as they had been told, it was to be the last LM to be flight ready. |
Max Q
Member Posts: 399
From: Whyalla South Australia
Registered: Mar 2007
|
posted 08-12-2011 06:10 AM
I wonder sometimes about the costs involved in the space program. They had launch vehicles available that cost a packet in sure. The had at least 1 LM and some CM's (as I understand), Even returned crews who could have returned with a minimum of training. So it comes down to the cost of labour was it really that prohibitive to finish the completed vehicles. |
Fra Mauro
Member Posts: 1624
From: Bethpage, N.Y.
Registered: Jul 2002
|
posted 08-12-2011 11:34 AM
I don't know the exact numbers but the cost of manufacturing the hardware was more than the cost of flying it. NASAdidn't save hundreds of millions by not flying Apollos 18,19 and 20. |
advertisement